Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indian Territory
    Posts
    13,819
    Actually, I did that in my head.. and I am not a mathematician .. I just figured 9x9 + 6 was the smallest number where sum of digits would total 87.
    On further consideration: 6,999,999,999 would be a smaller number... and any sequence of nine 9s and a 6 would work.
    Last edited by lonewolf; 10-24-2019 at 10:57 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    from an IP that never sent jazz that PM, never !
    Posts
    7,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    Great! That's all SkyNet needs to perfect AI that will subjugate and destroy humanity!

    Seriously though, this breakthrough will ultimately enable medical and environmental (and other) AIs that can save us and the planet!!
    I dont think the planet needs saving, it is very happy without us saving it.

    On a positive note, your idea about SkyNet and AI subjugating and destroying humanity. I think that would make a fantastic movie script!!.. It could be a variation on a christophany. We could have one AI unit that tries to save humanity from itself but humanity can not recognize the help that is sent to it and tries to destroy the one sent to save them. Well maybe that could be the second script in a series!
    Last edited by user4; 10-24-2019 at 10:55 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #23
    Quantum computers aren't fundamentally faster than classical computers in performing any single calculation; the quantum advantage is from massive parallelization of large numbers of similar calculations.

    You've probably already read or heard of quantum computing power described in "qubits". The great power of qubits is because when you have n qubits working together, they can do 2n calculations at the same time (that's 2 to the nth power, in case your device doesn't show the raised n).

    Google's quantum computer has 53 qubits, and 253 = 9007 trillion simultaneous calculations.

    But if the problem being solved is very sequential in nature, and thus cannot be broken down into a large number of parallel and similar steps, the quantum advantage is lost.

    I know I'm oversimplifying, and I'm not an expert on this topic; feel free to correct my oversimplifications if you're a particle physicist or quantum computing expert.
    Last edited by 18.99s; 10-25-2019 at 12:34 AM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,073
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    feel free to correct my oversimplifications if you're a particle physicist or quantum computing expert.
    Tumbleweeds blowing through town . . . crickets chirping . . .
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    3,399
    272 pages of light reading for anyone interested.
    https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25196/qu...-and-prospects

    From what I have briefly read (not the book by the way), I am not sure that quantum computing is remotely close to replacing and usurping classical computing for 99.99 percent of what computers currently do.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,073
    Quote Originally Posted by donley2 View Post
    I am not sure that quantum computing is remotely close to replacing and usurping classical computing for 99.99 percent of what computers currently do.
    Today.
    When QCs become commonplace (50 years?), they will look back at today's computers as we look at abaci!
    Just as many predicted (in the early 70s) that home computers would never find a market (what the heck would we need a computer for?), the uses of QCs will be so necessary they will be ingrained in daily life.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    from an IP that never sent jazz that PM, never !
    Posts
    7,023
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    ..But if the problem being solved is very sequential in nature, and thus cannot be broken down into a large number of parallel and similar steps, the quantum advantage is lost.

    I know I'm oversimplifying, and I'm not an expert on this topic; feel free to correct my oversimplifications if you're a particle physicist or quantum computing expert.
    You are spot on regarding parallelization and one of the greatest joys of computing is in finding where your problem can be parallelized and how. How much cross talk is needed between the parallel processes, when to merge and diverge. All these are issues that are addressed every day on classical computers (which certainly are not based on classical physics in the least) Indeed, we would have not even a laptop but for quantum mechanics.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #28
    More on this, from a Harvard prof who's been working on quantum computers:

    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...tum-supremacy/
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,073
    Quote Originally Posted by tandfman View Post
    More on this, from a Harvard prof who's been working on quantum computers:
    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...tum-supremacy/
    Since the first computers were room-sized, like the current QCs are, can we expect they will get smaller at the same rate ours did, or is there a fundamental problem why they can't? I was surprised to find these computers are only 50 bits (actually qubits) big. If we get to kilo- and then mega-qubit computers . . . AI will solve the Theory of Everything - and then we're really off to the races!!!
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    I was surprised to find these computers are only 50 bits (actually qubits) big.
    They are supercooled close to absolute zero, and they must be made to work together via quantum entanglement in order to get the exponential gains of the additional qubits.

    Bringing quantum computers to the masses will require a fundamentally different physical design. Right now quantum computers are in the equivalent stage of vacuum tube computers in the 1950s.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •